file tokenship under computational law?
https://twitter.com/i/lists/1327973837867266048
‘uberification’ From the french: la uberification
self-stylised random networks: ‘work’ within an economic culture that’s all but scattered completely.
It’s a simulated/stimulated marriage, is it not? A libidinal economy.
The travelling is an exit ritual to complete the intrinsic contract and to avoid the inception of liability (enveloping the pairing). There’s a hermetic drift, as outsized (heavenly) acceleration solves the base conception of a visionary achievement, to be en route to a perfected arrival, predestined, accomplished.
It’s the Red King and White Queen in the vessel, concocted out of financial motivism: the movable means — no, not only that— the vestibule on wheels, as a contract.
Global modelling parameters notwithstanding, the analogy of the vessel/vestibule and the logic/phenomena of the movable means: this viably works itself into a language model. Likewise with the contract on the EVM, its local artifacts, bags of side effects, plus the mere action outside the acope of its latent expressibility.
Aligning the embedded (potential) transfers via stepwise progression (means of transference) through the contract creates operational language (e.g. transaction) which is easily recognisable and thus codified: to generate resolved linguistic order (e.g. surface structure).
"While JuliaSim has acausal modeling as one of its core features, unlike Modelica-based tools that is just one of its domains. Accelerated simulation of PDEs with neural networks, integrating stochastic simulation into workflows, specific simulation environments for pharmacology and circuit modeling, and much more are all part of the JuliaSim product. We see the future as a place where composability will be necessary to achieve the next level of simulations."
ithakrash, [Apr 7, 2023 at 19:46] Multidimensional risk can be represented in terms of explicitivity and coincidence: the means of exposure and the fit of the investment e.g. the structure of the language (surface reflective or otherwise). i. e. S. “In the narrower sense”
To implement the general case e.g. Ethereum tokenship through simulated multidimensional risk.
The application elicits causal (transactional) connection to the localised network which subjugates risk and acausal markings of assessment: to assume that any exchange impossible in the larger sense (esp. without an intermediary token and/or reference network).
In the graphing of the language is the fungibility.
In a state of exchange, the language (code) of a contract that is instantiating/substantiating partial fungibility (via execution) can be expressed (e.g. further computed) as an incomplete graph —just another stack. With non-fungibility, come the points of discontinuity; with multi-fungibility, the various bounds. Full fungibility seems to be something of a luxury —like an idealised motif or a doctrinal oversight.
Each control feature is dialectically imposing its own reach (value assessment) within the language mapping problem; the explicitivity and effectiveness of the app’s world-view evaluation system (e.g. of risk/reward analysis) is just a minor part of the overall graph, considering all the environment’s controlling limits (say, of the contract or of the VM itself).
It’s not trivial to isolate the one from the other (all the graphs biject) so we must then ask: is this a financial experience without usage (automatic, immersive) and will more control (i.e.agency) make up for the non-activity, the loss of any sense of leisure, the cost of mentally maintaining the propaganda on the merits of a lessening notional value?
To involve oneself via non-usage… that’s uberification to me. In the business sense, both driver and passenger are customers, users of the software, yes; and uberisation would probably be the term in English yet that somehow doesn’t cut it.
Beyond the manual button pressing, ranking and whatnot, both actors commit to the operation of the vehicle, which is a life-risking endeavour any day of the week: this sublimates the experience into a game of consensus. The product is the thrill ride and the nod goodbye.
The product is a fast rendering of many fears, all taken in at once —and then the resolution of as much in the end.
At the same time, one ride is like another, so the fears are rational, sensible and socialised.
https://twitter.com/neonbeautysleep/status/160204938151949516recognitions9?s=12
Generalised Fungibility as a Transfer Process: the outlined batch of assumptions, modelled as a Transport Phenomenon e.g. to carry forward the tokenisation —even to the point of abstracting away the relevant marks of distinction left open-ended in the convoluted language model (the specifying arrays or transactional records, as it were).